1. Field of Invention
This invention relates to vehicle anti-theft or unauthorized use devices which disable the vehicles pneumatic tire by puncture.
2. Description of Prior Art
Vehicle theft or unauthorized use is a major problem for every-one concerned, to the point that a vehicle is stolen every 20 seconds in the U.S., according to the National Auto Theft Bureau--1991. Most of the time, if a vehicle is recovered, it is stripped of its component parts and only a shell remains. This affects the general public in increased insurance rates, increased police costs for paperwork, and certainly creates expenses for the individual whose vehicle has been stolen.
There are many approaches that have been developed to prevent the unauthorized use or theft of a vehicle. They generally fit into three categories. The first is the noise or alarm category that sounds or goes off when a vehicle is entered without authorization. This noise has become commonplace and is ignored by passersby. In fact, it has created the necessity for several laws to be enacted that prevent an alarm on a vehicle from sounding for more than 15 minutes. In some States, the owner of the vehicle is subject to a fine (New York State Vehicle and Traffic law #1642-14 375-47). This has created a need for another means for a vehicle theft-deterrent or unauthorized use solutions.
The second category for unauthorized use or theft prevention is accessories which lock ignitions, steering wheels, and transmissions. They are easily detected and a well-equipped thief is able to bypass or disconnect them by cutting the steering wheel, in a short period of time, thereby making them ineffective.
The third category and most effective is that which disables a vehicle or makes it very difficult to drive. These, such as ignition cutoff or gas cutoff switches, are usually detected when the vehicle is started and a skilled person can usually bypass or disconnect these deterrents without being noticed.
One manner of disabling a vehicle and making its use very difficult and noticeable is to deflate one or more tires on the vehicle when the tire is rotated--activating the device. Examples of tire deflation devices for air inflated vehicle tires are shown in U.S. Pat. No. 2,737,223 issued Mar. 6, 1956 to R. Path for Automatic Partial Deflating Apparatus for Vehicle Tires; and U.S. Pat. No. 4,657,057 issued Apr. 14, 1987 to J. S. Ha for Safety Tire Valve for Controlling Speed of Vehicle. However, the device of the former patent only partially deflates the tire allowing continued use of the vehicle, and the device of the latter patent is only responsive to excessive speeds that might not be the case in theft or unauthorized use.
The concept of tire deflation as a vehicle anti-theft or unauthorized use device is further exemplified by mechanisms shown and described in U.S. Pat. No. 3,003,539 issued Oct. 10, 1961 to RM Tone for Car Theft Tire Deflation. It is also shown in U.S. Pat. No. 3,910,221 issued Oct. 7, 1975 to RL Aske, et al for Anti-Theft Device and in U.S. Pat. No. 4,3752,000 issued Mar. 1, 1983 to GA Bertani et al for Anti-Theft Device. Another is in U.S. Pat. No. 4,8118,929 issued Apr. 4, 1989 to F. Mourot et al for Vehicle Anti-Theft Device Marking at least one Wheel Unserviceable and a Wheel Comprising the Device; and U.S. Pat. No. 5,090,223 issued Feb. 25, 1992 to John Ruffler for Car Theft Deterrent to Deflate Tire.
All of these devices use the valve of the tire as the operating factor and in each case a special tool (key) is needed. Also if the tire valve is at the 6 o'clock position, it seems it would be difficult to install. Another example of a tire deflation device is U.S. Pat. No. 4,164,131 issued Aug. 14, 1989 to John W. Desmond and Frank DiFerdinando for Automobile Anti-Theft Device. However, the device is noticeable and a special tool is needed. None of the prior patents seem to provide a means by which the authorized user of the vehicle can remember to remove the device personally before using the vehicle.
It seems that if the key or special tool is lost or misplaced it causes a considerable problem for the users of the prior art, if the devices were already installed on the vehicle. It would also seem that if the keys or tools were lost, the devices would be useless. In essence these devices need two separate factors to operate as claimed.
It also seems that all above mentioned previous art is activated or installed on a tire where it is visible and apparent. This would allow a thief or unauthorized user the possibility of bypassing the devices.